[Avodah] new editions

[Arie Folger]

RMB wrote:
> a- Arguably the Beis Yoseif was a rishon, but
> as the author of a post-SA teshuvah the very
> same mechaber is arguably an acharon!

Sorry, but - bim'hilat kevot Torato - the above sounds like pure
nonsense. Writing (even printing) the SA was not a magical moment that
turned all authors into A'haronim. In fact, if you'd want to go by
acceptance of the SA as *the* codex, then you'd want to know when it
was accepted, which took at least a few years.

But all that is unneeded. There is no strict demarcation line, just
like there is no strict line between Tannaim and Amoraim, with Rav
tanna upalig, R' 'Hiyya and R' Oshaya, etc. Why should the Rishonim
fare better than the Tannaim and have a strict line that "protects"
them from the A'haronim? And I didn't even get to the sources that
state that given true greatness, one can calmly disagree with Rishonim
and even Geonim. Just the Talmud is a solid line. I believe R' Moshe
says so, I didn't see it inside, but heard it a few months ago from R'
Hershel Schachter.

So, I agree that there are different ways to attempt to figure out
what the Beis Yossef *really* thought (and I am quite mystified that
you left out his magnum opus from the sources of possible definite
opinion. I would consider that the most weighty source), but I cannot
see how a responsum written after the SA's publication date would be
less weighty than a responsum written five years earlier.

-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Cows moo-ve over: camel milk coming to Europe
* Scharfe Analyse der Gaza-Flotte auf ARD
* The New Face of Jewish Studitainment
* Should Humanity Call it Quits
* Sollten wir alle Kohanim sein?
* Videovortrag: Wer hat die Psalmen verfasst?